Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 35

[JosephSHaas]

To: "BROWN ELAINE; GONZALEZ CIRINO; RILEY DANIEL; "

Subject: "All 3 get 25 minutes on 5/5 @ 9:30 to 9:55 a.m."

Message: "Reno: I did just read the e-mail from your father about a 4/29. Thu. info sheet of yesterday (today = Fri. 4/30), that the attorneys divvy up what they allow each to have, like maybe an average of 8 minutes each x 3 = 24 minutes.  Good luck, -- Joe"

"Message successfully sent."

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste of the e-mail just sent to: Elaine, Danny and Reno:

Subject: "The Kent State Massacre of May 4, 1970. "

Message: "The 40th Anniversary of The Kent State Massacre is this Tuesday, May 4th. It was a Monday back then in 1970 when the Ohio National Guard fired on the students killing 4 of them, and wounding 9 others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.  - - Yesterday and today, RTV Cable Channel 20 here in New England (and I presume nationwide, as they do cover the country) did a re-broadcast from 4-5:00 p.m. of Hal Holbrook's 2-part episode of "The Bold Ones" entitled: "A Continual Roar of Musketry". These episodes aired in November of just months after the real deal. The bottom line being of what H.H. as "Senator Hays Stowe" said in his "Commission" of something like: If men in positions of authority and responsibility* act with aggravation before investigation they must answer in the courts. Too bad that history repeats itself to those who do not learn from it.  Reference your case of not only: "Show Ed the Law", but like in that June 20, 2007 Article 49 Petition of: Show us your authority! * THE responsibility upon the governor by Article 41 who failed to do his Art. 51 duty of to enforce all legislative mandates as by the shall word in RSA Ch. 123:1. To have sent the Feds a written invitation to file. THE Fed to file being the G.S.A. Landlord over there for their tenant court. 40USC255 to 40USC3112, and as "they" know to be the case by their own U.S. Attorney Manual #664. Ignorance of the Law is no excuse! The case-law too of that Adams case of 1945 at the U.S. Supreme Court. A conditional consent un-accepted is NOT consent.  You Art. 12 inhabitants deserved protection and didn't get it, and you all are further harmed by a judge who disobeys what America stands for: a republic defined as for judicial review of executive decisions.  The governor's decision of NOT to send out the invitation. To refuse** to have the evidence of non-filing marked as an exhibit for the trial jury to weigh in reaching their verdict that in N.H. has to be Art. 14 complete but wasn't.  The Feds in contempt of The N.H. Constitution! Hopefully the judges in Boston on Wednesday, May 5th will read, see and hear this from your attorneys.  A copy of this now over to the N.H. Underground as Reply #_____.  Best wishes, - - Joe

Footnote: ** The denial was NOT at the time of the side bar, as I finally did get to read the transcript therefrom more than 2 years later, of Bownes objecting, but why? And the judge leaving it to Sven to "lay a foundation" to which to have it entered.  The foundation was already stated by Kinsella: Did you (Reno) do ANYthing to try to peacefully resolved this WITH the example of contacting the U.S. Marshals.  The emphasis on the word ANY, NOT Marshals as in your answer of what was last referred to.  THE denial was when he REFUSED to hear my "Point of Order" that is NOT in the transcript! Thus the First Circuit Judges of WHOever do not have that before them, nor was it given to them by me who had my Merrimack County case against Deputy U.S. Marshal Jamie Barry for said assault for pushing me out of the courtroom #4 that day with my hat on, pushed up to there and down to Rhode Island, thus by-passing Boston.  Therefore Reno: your attorney David Bownes of Laconia ought to apologize to you for making this objection, and Danny: your attorney Sven Wiberg of Portsmouth ought to apologize for being with lack of sleep, on caffeine from coffee and not with a follow-through of the objection that Singal didn't rule on! The judge left it up to Sven, and Sven blew it! Jason's two attorneys merely looked on and did nothing!! They were worthless!!"

"Message successfully sent."

[JosephSHaas]

"Day 11
Morning session

Cross exam by Sven Wiberg
Page 61

10Q     Just so we're absolutely clear, you had no
11        agreement or plan or conspiracy with either of the two
12        gentlemen that are defendants at the far tables?

13A     I disassociate myself with anybody.

14Q     And you were not a witness to any agreements

15        by either of them, Mr. Riley or Mr. Gerhard, with

16        anybody else, were you?

17        Not those two[?] no.

18Q     Now, speaking about making attempts or what

19        your purpose was there on the property, in June of 2007

20        did you approach government personnel or government

21        leaders her in New Hampshire to attempt to effect a

22        peaceful resolution?

23A     In June? No, no, I never approached anybody
            [Reno underlines "I" &| "approached" ]

24Q     May I approach the witness?
25        THE COURT: That's exhibit?



Page 62

1          MR. WIBERG: It's not an exhibit, judge. and

2          I'm only offering it to refresh his recollection.

3          THE COURT: Mark it, please. That's Riley?
4          THE CLERK: Z.

5          MR. WIBER: Z.

6          THE COURT: Thank you very much. After
7          government sees, I will see counsel at sidebar.

8          (Riely Exhibit Z was

9          marked for Identification.)

10        AT SIDEBAR

11        THE COURT; Can I see it. Thank you very

12        much.

13        MR. WIBERG: I'm not intending to offer it. I

14        just want to see if it refreshes his recollection

15        THE COURT: He hasn't indicated any absence of
16        recollection.

17        MR. WIBERG: I'll lay the foundation.

18        THE COURT: He's actually answered. I'm not

19        sure – I don't know what your point is.

20        MR. WIBERG; I thought he did indicate he
21        didn't recall.

22        THE COURT: You really want to take a chance

23        on this* going in, Mr. Wiberg, because it might after you

24        show it. That's up to you. I'm going to let you do

25        what you want. You think about it. I'm happy to let

[* Cirino note: this is believed to be a page that was
delivered by Mr. Haas, Joe. Proving the Feds
are in New Hamphire illegally. Signed by myself &]


Page 63
1          you. I don't want to prejudice the defendants. I'm

2          just concerned here. Did you say you object, mr.

3          Bownes?

4          MR BOWNES: I do.

5          THE COURT: Did you get that? Do what you

6          want, Mr. Wiberg.

7                      BEFORE THE JURY

8          THE COURT: Lay a foundation.

9Q       BY MR. WIBERG:      Actually, judge, I will move
10        for the moment. You watched the –

11        THE COURT:  All right, the record will show
12        the question's withdrawn. Go ahead.

13        MR. WIBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

14Q     BY MR.WIBERG: You watched the video of June

15        7, correct, the clips?

16A     Which one?
17Q     In other words, we watched an exhibit that has

18        three separate clips ---

19A     Yes.

20Q     -- that's Mr. Riley. Did you see anything
21        other than assault rifles in the video as you watched

22        it?

23A     Which one? Which Video? All three?

24Q     Of any of them?

25A     I didn't finish watching the third one, and I

Page 64"

[JosephSHaas]

Berlin, N.H. Federal Prison is scheduled to open for business in early 2011.  Men only and for up to a 25-yr. sentence, http://www.nheconomy.com/prison.aspx

so Ed's of over that # amount not eligible, http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=Edward&Middle=&LastName=Brown&Race=W&Sex=M&Age=&x=71&y=14 to 2044.

-- Joe

[KBCraig]

Berlin, N.H. Federal Prison is scheduled to open for business in early 2011.  Men only and for up to a 25-yr. sentence, http://www.nheconomy.com/prison.aspx

so Ed's of over that # amount not eligible, http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=Edward&Middle=&LastName=Brown&Race=W&Sex=M&Age=&x=71&y=14 to 2044.

-- Joe

Sentence length is one of the determining factors in security level, but not the only factor. Ed's in a "medium" right now, same as Berlin will be.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste, as likewise by forward over to Henry and Harvey, re: " Henry: F.Y.I. I goofed, I put the Chief's e-mail in the box to copy, but forgot to erase it.  No big deal. We're all withIN the law better than those who we pay to enforce it! -- Joe"

"Uncle Sam's sack breaks on Cinco de Mayo! (he's sunk in Boston)?
From:    Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Tue 5/04/10 1:04 PM
To:    Jose G.; Donna V.; Bill R.; Keith C.; David H-B; Bernie B.; Andy T.; Dick Marple (armlaw at hotmail.com); Katt K.; Concord Police Dept. (police at onconcord.com)
Bcc:    Wayne B.

Title 26 U.S. Code Section 1691 http://vlex.com/vid/sec-seal-and-teste-process-19212127 of: "All writs and process issuing from a court of the United States shall be under the seal of the court and signed by the clerk thereof."

Read more: http://vlex.com/vid/sec-seal-and-teste-process-19212127#ixzz0myleWOCp  [this hyperlink automatically placed here by my copy and paste of the above, so yet to read and comment upon.]

Wow! And I mean WOW in all capital letters!  Danny has found the straw that breaks the camel's back, or in this case "Uncle Sam's sack", his/Uncle Sam's  balls burst as what happened to Judas Iscariot the betrayer, who returned the bribe $money and then he hanged himself. Matthew 27:5 "And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judas_Iscariot "Judas hanged himself in the field, and afterwards the rope snapped, and his body burst open on the ground,[15][ " and footnote #15: "

   1. ^ a b Zwiep, Arie W. Judas and the choice of Matthias: a study on context and concern of Acts 1:15-26. p. 109."
   2.

Matthias chosen over Justice to take his place in the Twelve Disciples, if my memory serves me correct, see; _______________. Or in this case of in-justice by (1) Executives both within the state (as by the local, county and State do-nothings to protect COPs)  plus Federal lackey to the court COPS (as by the U.S. Marshals) AND (2) Judicial Bozo's in both the State (County and Supremes who allow the PULLERS, as in Danny's case #2007-0745, to be even WORSE than the PUSHERS) plus Federal judges to get away with pretending to hold "authority" that they do NOT have! UNTIL "corrected" by the judges in Boston at the APPEAL level of the Federal Court.  There being NO N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 filing from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, and as spelled out in the papers from Dan to me received in yesterday's mail: see Starr v. United States, 38 L.Ed. 841, 153 U.S. 614 (_____) @ page #___ for Mr. Chief Justice Fuller's OPINION that of about the "seal, for that is his authority. Per Brudnel, Ch. J, 14 H. VIII. 16."

Hey! Isn't that to where these "criminals" went of to be "corrected": at the Federal "Correctional" Facilities? (;-) The class of all classes to make it a nationwide course across the country be like another "shot heard around the world" just a stone's throw from "Bunker Hill".  A throw by Bangor, Maine's "Paul Bunyan" that is, (;-) Him waking up from a sleep to take care of that Singal judge of Portland (George Z.) in violation of 18USC3232 Paul Bunyan hearing the arguments of righteous victims having been dragged across the state line illegally!  putting shame on SOME of the attorneys who argue their case tomorrow in Boston at from 9:30 - :55 a.m. in courtroom #____ them redeeming themselves by what Joshua Gordon did and does present in his #12 of 12 for the court in N.H. withOUT authority and so to dismiss all charges against these Freedom Fighters deserving of a parade down Pleasant Street to Main Street too with a few spits on the Goddess of Injustice there in the hall of corruption! Whose head thereof ought to be cut off and put at the top of a pike and displayed outside City Hall, but whose COPs there did nothing to check and balance this either! Them thieves/ oath-breakers to RSA Ch. 42:1 + 92:2 for having not protected these Art. 12 inhabitants! after my claim in writing that they do so! To get a new crop of COPs to there from a PS&T who takes over 20% of the take from the criminal fines to supposedly teach the truth to NOW finally do so! cc: to Chief Robert Barry at police at onconcord.com with the redacted e-mail addresses of course, to prepare for his departure, or will he finally now investigate those "Tampering with Public Records" over there of false information into government records of there being NO arrest of Ed & Elaine Brown, re: the Return of Service showing NO arrests because why? Because there was no official authorized version of Arrest Warrants?  A & W served without a seal? (;-) Very interesting, don't you think? Of two wrongs make a right!?  Chief: WHERE did you get your education? They teach THIS over at The Police Academy? The PS&T: Police Standards & Training; http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XV/188-F/188-F-31.htm

Way to go Danny!, a copy and paste of this in two parts over at the N.H. Underground,
http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.9630 as Reply #9632 on page 643.

Good luck, - - Joe

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: "DANIEL RILEY (14528052)" .... (continued).

[JosephSHaas]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: "DANIEL RILEY (14528052)"

Date: "5/4/2010 8:42:06 AM"

Subject: "Search Warrant NO SEAL"

Message: "I rec'd an UNcertified copy of the arrest warrant today and it is missing the required seal, see 28 USC 1691. It was issued by the Magistrate, but signed by the clerk, I believe because the signature is undiscernable, but its not the magistrate's name. The magistrate has his own seal, see 28 USC 638(c), so both of them have a seal, so it is required, as per the commom law I mailed to Bill, Sven & Joe. A seal is mandatory if required by staute or if the officer has a seal, in this case we have both requirements.

In the colonial days and in english common law, a search warrant was called a writ of assistance, the Supreme Court uses the word writ and warrant synonymously in the following cases( meaning they interchange them, referring to the same document):

Barry v US ex rel Cunningham 73 led 867 @ 871

Bryan v Ker 56 led 114 @ 117

Dryer v Illinois 47 led 79 @ 84

US v Nix 47 led 775 @ 776

Wong Wing v US 41 led 140 @ 141

so a warrant is a writ, see Black's law for the definition of a warrant, and a writ is defined as a court's written order.

The way i see it, is these warrants for arrest and for search are null and void, from the beginning, because the lack the required seal, and a seal equals authority, therefore: there was no authority backing these phoney writs.

Everyone should get UNcertified copies of these warrants to see if the required seals are there. I gurantee they are not. beacause the whole case is in equity not law."

[JosephSHaas]

T - minus 2 minutes to countdown:

The judges for today's 9:30 - :55 a.m. hearing are:

1.) Chief woman judge Lynch
2.) David Hacket Souter +
3.) (Mr.) Selya

- - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Why no posting here before the event !?

"First Circuit RSS
   Along with audio recordings of the court's oral arguments, electronic versions of the court's opinions are now available via RSS (Real Simple Syndication), a method of delivering web content directly to you without cluttering your inbox with e-mail. Until now, electronic versions of the court's opinions were available only through e-mail with an opinion attached. We will soon be phasing out this method and strongly encourage current subscribers to convert to RSS, which will allow you to search, sort, and filter information. Here is how it works.

   RSS delivers Web content called a "feed" or "channel" that is written in standard computer language (XML). It requires an RSS Reader, a small software program that collects and displays RSS feeds. Current versions of Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Safari Web browsers have built-in RSS Readers. But if you are using Internet Explorer 6.0 or earlier, you will need to obtain an RSS Reader. These are available on the Web. Some are free; others may be purchased.

   Once you have acquired an RSS Reader, you will need to see what it requires you to do to add a new "feed" or "channel." Each reader has a slightly different way of doing this. Some readers, when used with the newest Web browsers, will allow you to add new channels with a single click. Others may require you to copy the Web address (also called a URL) of the new feed from your Web browser's address and paste it into the "Add New Channel" Section of new RSS Reader.

   You will have to follow the directions of your RSS Reader to establish a feed or channel to the court's opinions [and any other RSS feeds you may want]. In most cases, all you will need to do is:

    * Click on the link or small RSS button near the feed that you want (e.g., First Circuit RSS Feeds);
    * See the feed's Web address (URL) in your Web browers bar;
    * Copy the feed's Web address into the "Add New Channel" section of your RSS Reader


For example, the URL that you would copy into your Web browser's address bar to establish an RSS feed:
   for this court's opinions is http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/opinions/opinionrss.php
   for this court's oral arguments http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/files/audio/audiorss.php

   Once you have added that Web address to your RSS Reader, the feed will start and regularly update this court's opinions for you.
        
1st Circuit RSS Feeds


Oral Arguments:
• RSS standard audio podcast:  rss podcast icon

Opinions:  1st Circuit RSS opinions "

[JosephSHaas]

I press the hyperlink and it goes to a blank screen!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Donna:  Are you taping this to feed to us over here later?

[JosephSHaas]

RE:  http://council.lebnh.net/

Today: http://council.lebnh.net/boards-committees/home/agendas

Details: http://council.lebnh.net/boards-committees/home/agendas/2010-city-council-agendas/city-council---may-5-2010-1

More details: http://www.lebcity.net/BComm/agendas/City%20Council/2010/May%205,%202010%20-%20Regular%20Meeting/2010-05-05%20AGENDA%20COVER.pdf

[DonnaVanMeter]

As soon as the audio gets posted online I will get linkage posted here.

Heres an article I just received in Google alerts.

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/supporters-of-nh-tax-evaders-appeal-convictions-671452.html

I press the hyperlink and it goes to a blank screen!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Donna:  Are you taping this to feed to us over here later?

[JosephSHaas]

To: "BROWN EDWARD; BROWN ELAINE; GONZALEZ CIRINO; RILEY DANIEL; "

Subject: "My reply to today's A.P. story of Boston Appeal Hearing."

Message: "Hi Ed! 1st e-mail here. [ And Elaine, plus Reno and Dan. ] Here's my post ("Please wait while we add your comment" it keeps beeping at me over at:  http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/supporters-of-nh-tax-evaders-appeal-convictions-671452.html    from the A.P. story by Denise Lavoie who published her view of what happened today at 12:06 p.m. and updated @ 2:06 p.m. - Donna posting it over at The N.H. Underground is HOW I found it. I can send you a copy and paste if you'd like, just let me know, so as not to swamp you with too much stuff.):

"Denise, What about Appeal point #12 of 12? by Attorney Joshua Gordon of Concord, N.H. who took over the case for Cirino Gonzalez after booting Laconia N.H. Attorney David H. Bownes from the appeal. Reference there being no jurisdictional authority since the Feds FAILed to file their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 operating papers by RSA Ch. 123:1 with Bill Gardner's N.H. Office of Secretary of State as required by the "shall" word from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, and the Adams case of 1943 at the U.S. Supreme Court in that an offer un-accepted is NOT consent. The U.S. Attorney KNOWS this by his Manual #664. All these attorneys except for Gordon were involved in the below travels to Maine for illegal hearings in Portland before Judge George Z. Singal. Illegal as against 18USC3232 in that ALL proceedings SHALL be held in the District of where the offense occurred. With Judge David Hackett Souter aka Mr. Starce Decisis there today, this fact alone ought to get them at least a new trial. Procedural due process of law. 5th + 14th Amendments. Chief culprit in that department: our former N.H. A.G. Jeffrey R. Howard of the Circuit now who cut them the checks!  My complaint to Fed. Rep. Shea-Porter to have him impeached has fallen on deaf ears. Same goes for Hodes: one of the buddies of the Bar to protect the brotherhood that I find disgusting! The other judges today being: Chief Lynch the woman judge and (Mr.) Selya. What questions were asked by them if any? I see that there's an Archive at the Feds to listen to this what? 25 minute hearing from 9:30 -:55 a.m.? As for Riley being on his own, check out another violation by BOTH the Feds AND Souter's former buddies at the N.H. Supreme Court in case #2007-0745 of where they allowed the Feds to PULL the case there to the Feds when by the U.S. Code it's prescribed only that it be PUSHed by the defendant who was the Superintendent of the Jail and NOT these 3rd party intervenors!  You call that "The Rule of Law"!?  I call it THEFT! and likewise theft of when Judge Jean K. (Mrs. Peter Hoe) Burling let the U.S. Code over-ride the rights of these Article 12 "inhabitants" of the Browns who started this as plaintiffs against the I.R.S. in Grafton County Superior Court. It since escalated to these Article 30 citizens of New York and Texas plus Vermont brought unlawfully into N.H. too! There having been no check-and-balance by the authorities there because they never asked to see the seal of court on the Arrest Warrants! BELIEVE IT OR NOT! - at least as for Daniel Riley who sent me a photocopy of his un-sealed copy and 28 USC Sec. 1691: "All Writs and process issuing from a court of the United States SHALL be under the seal of the court and signed by the clerk thereof." Re: Mr. Chief Justice Fuller in Starr v. United States, 38 L.Ed. 841, 153 U.S. 614 (____) because the seal "is his authority. Per Brudnel, Ch. J., 14 H. VIII. 16."  Amen. "

note: the A.P. story telling of how there is no "conspiracy" blah, blah, blah to at least get the charges reduced. To me that's like saying the barber took too much hair off, when the real question ought to be of where is your barbering license? to begin with!

Best wishes to you all, -- Joe  cc: to Jose, Donna, Keith (for Jason), Bernie, David H-B, Andy T., Dick Marple and by relay over to The N.H. Underground. "

"Message successfully sent."

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/files/audio/08-2300.mp3

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2010/05/06/supporters_of_nh_tax_evaders_appeal_convictions/